Theoretical frameworks on supplier relationship management in enterprise economy

Abstract— The evolution of modern communication methods, especially the transfer of data and information via the Internet, allowing companies to relocate relationships with business partners worldwide. New trends in the field of management, especially in the economic instability that shakes the world, have generated an increase in the significance of the concept of supplier relationship management (SRM). Enterprises that grants importance to this new concept become more flexible in dealings. By exchange of information they can streamline business processes more effectively and may have better access to resources boom. In this context, the success of an organization is due not only to their own efforts, but undoubtedly the result of collaboration with partners.
Keywords- supply relationship management, commitment, influence, behavior, collaboration, partnership.
The deepening global economic disparities at regional or country level produces dramatic effects in the approach of business relationships. Constant changes in the market involve companies in a global competition [1]. Thus, in response to the upheavals of the new economic environment, companies can use competitive behavior and readjustment strategies to widening communications with business partners [2]. These challenges are forcing economic operators to accept and implement new technologies, to adopt modified forms of organization and management, to connect and to join electronic networks for transferring information for not coming in isolation, and, last but not least, to look in a different way the contribution of individual to the development of the company and its corporate strategies. Therefore, in terms of access to increasingly limited resources the option for integration and strengthening relations in the supply chain enables a better understanding of the needs and desires of partners [3]. Moreover, creating and maintaining a good supplier relationships emerges as a breath of new managerial philosophy based on several key features: growth and development, respect, partnership, proper risk management, developing new capabilities. But all this requires costs. Which weigh in company option to choose and maintain certain providers is undoubtedly the benefit consistency made on short or long term. Thus, by permanent concern they have, respective coordinate activities in order to obtain a benefit, companies focus more on suppliers than customers. Close collaboration with a valuable set of suppliers is always more productive than termination with them [5]. With such perspective customers and suppliers are not intended primarily to maximize short-term trading results, but looking for an advantage generated by long-term ties. Thus, through the relationship with suppliers, business management is put into a new light, and companies that are willing to embrace this philosophy will acquire in time adequate results. It is necessary to seek along with the partners the most effective ways of maintaining risk management business credibility and commitment initiated.
A number of authors, Donoghue [4], IDC [13] argue existence of three essential elements in SRM: collaboration, integration and trust.
A. Colaboration

One way is to take the collaboration partner enterprises of the principle just the right time (JIT) “Fig. 1”.

Larson [14] Guerra and Cianchette [15] consider that such cooperation does not require for networking organizations just an art of maintaining a balance between supply and demand, or only a mathematical rigor in the production process, or perfect synchronization of supply in customer-supplier equation, but also the mutual benefit provided by implementing common applications that enable continuous exchange of information and better control over the management of long-term contracts. More flexible organizational processes in terms of SRM by such agreements also involve discussion between the partners for the availability of affordable solutions. It is envisaged first the customer savings, and secondly guarantees for suppliers that goods will not remain in stock.
As for cooperation in the information exchange, Wienclaw [16], Wis. & Morrison [17] explain historical development of relations with suppliers, especially by making B2B software, by computer networks, the purchase and installation software , ideas, supported by Sethi [2] by showing businesses real time access in to information shared as a result of overcoming many of the technical barriers of the past thanks to the IT boom of 21st century.
B. Integration
By integrating, SRM intends to deepen the ties of dependency and mutual influence between the parties, creating the synergy processes in the value chain. Synthesizing the best practices of SRM, Barry, Senthil and Pradip [18] agree that the key business players, using a common e-platform of trade and marketing (e-marketplaces) they enlarge their e-business concerns, synchronizing the processes by connecting companies directly or indirectly. A similar view expresses the researchers Gartner Group [19] concerning the activation e-sourcing activities and e-procurement in B2B electronic market platform using the Internet. This approach to SRM enables large enterprises, small and medium to exchange goods, services, and information in a more efficient and effective way than was previously possible. Even if the supplier relationship management is theoretically it has a broad coverage and is not in Daley’s opinion [20] fully installed as a competence in business management, but rather accepted and defined as a formal discipline after Evans [21]. As a result of inadequate definition in SRM organizations it has little impact. It is in an identity crisis and has reduced its functions in integrated enterprise activities. Given the current limited objectives, particularly the cost of operating and risk management, says Vliet [22], SRM does not always appear as a source of competitive advantage. His study shows first frequency signal that this happens in organizations whose managers focus exclusively on supply problems, with low important component in increasing the effectiveness of relationship management. Secondly, some companies always pay attention to what managers are doing to strengths the links with suppliers recognizing the significance of relative size is important in creating value for the benefit of both parties.
C. Trust
The success depends on reliability and commitment of each partner in achieving strategies. Thus, SRM requests the acquisition and implementation of skills, values and behaviors aligned without distinction between providers. Usually, Mettler and Rohner [23] argue that the relationship with the suppliers concerns directly the development of the product or service. Taking into account these arguments as valid, Gecker [24] consider the beginning of the relationship as a strategic sourcing initiative and Emiliani [25] aware that this subsequently evolves in data and performance indicators. Adapting to the changing demands of end users is possible, as claimed by Lintukangas [26], the proximity of suppliers to increase trust and deepening cooperation and interaction.
Given these above three components, the company may adopt and implement a management system of providers to meet needs and to establish requirements in a fair. It may also standardizing the nomenclature of products, as suggested by Poirier [27]. This way no confusion or misunderstanding may occur regarding the delivery of goods or services.
A. Behaviour
Different behavior of economic agents and consumers are influenced by the needs and possibilities of access to resources. In their efforts to have a certain influence, the economic actors are in different relationships, but in Pound’s opinion [28], without always having a systematic and successful way. Therefore, as Moldovan [29] says, a relationship is convenient while it works fine. That is, for as long as the work and effort are appreciated and the desires and needs are taken into account. Achieving and maintaining connections in B2B relationships are the result of the efforts of partners. Strengthening of relationship gives safety to the parties while confidence expresses and devotion records. Thus supplier knows that he will have support if problems arise. However in a combination of type SRM it may occur elements that do not go well, that may vitiate the relationship, destabilize even hopelessly compromise it. It may appear different points of view (even if the ideas seem to be converging) state of decline, demotivation. Overcoming or elimination of problems in organizations can be done by using analytical models and influence behavior. Patterson, Grenny, Maxfield and McMillan [30], propose the use of the “six sources of influence” model through which the company can identify measurable results, vital behavior and motivations and skills “figure 2 “.

Establishing the organization’s mission by using this model will inevitably change the attitude. Delimitation of of the relationship and clearly state of rules then you have to work with it will remove any assumptions that the partner would know instinctively to adapt the situations. Knowing the parameters of the relationship, perception of partner changes. Provider is given trust and hope in addressing seriously the obligations assumed. Therefore, understanding compliance requirements increase safety and reliability. Being a long process, building and confidence building is addressed especially to men. Abosag, Tynan and Lewis [31] argue that individuals’ emotional involvement further reflects on economic relations Therefore, curdling trust claims politeness, friendship, empathy, similarity, honestly.
B. Commitement
Studying organizational behavior, especially in personal –organization relationship, enabled the emergence of the concept of commitment in the early 1950s. After Abrahamsson [32], the evolution and development of the concept of commitment as presented in today literature, is based on several investigations, claims and disputes between researchers. Many definitions of commitment and measurement methods have been integrated in different models, the most commonly used model of organizational commitment has three components – affective commitment, normative commitment and continuous commitment as proposed by Meyer and Allen [33].
By adopting commitment by the supplier, according to Abosag, Tynan, Lewis Dwyer [31], it is outlined the long-term benefits: quality products with lower cost information flow improved. The concept of Schurr and Oh [34], the implicit or explicit promise to continue the relationship is supported by Somogyi and Gyau [35], but it is envisaged the faith of partners for any short-term sacrifices to maintain the stability and efficiency as assessed Gyau and Spiller [36].
Representing the amount engages different entities to work together for a common goal, commitment is central to economic relations between partners. In Vogele’s opinion [37], commitment is the force that drives the relationship forward thus it is equated with growth or profitability. Studying manifestation commitment partners Corner and Patterson [38] Corner [39], notifies the occurrence of all kinds of tensions, resistances, and barriers that make it difficult to maintain it because the parties are unable to see the scale from the beginning their actions. The proposed model identifies three major phases of involvement in change, each assuming the completion of several steps ”fig. 3”.

To become more competitive companies must face global competition may otherwise risk leaving the business.
Following the achieving of additional values larger companies can make mistakes in choosing suppliers.
Hence the need to identify key suppliers. Degree of cooperation from the perspective of Billingt, Cordon, Volmanit [40], can provide a segmentation of suppliers in a mix of four levels “fig. 4” on low, common to one very high of super-collaboration.

Trying to determine the depth of the relationship between partners in a business, Lambert [41], proposes a segmentation of collaborations with suppliers through a process with four components as follows: close, partnership, association, vertical integration “fig. 5”

Lambert, Knemeyer, Gardner [42], confirm that the common law definition of partnership as a business relationship based on mutual trust, openness, sharing risks and rewards arising in business. Therefore, the partnership provides high performance of companies involved, more than would be achieved if they work separately.
Creating and implementing a partnership is a great challenge for managers who know that not all providers may be considered partners. Therefore their interest goes to those companies which will be a true partner. Implementing, developing and improving relations with suppliers can be based on a partnership model involving assessment, formulation, consultation, implementation, negotiation.
Any partnership model contains three types of partnership, says Lambert [41] by making the following specification:
• Type I – with the wider use and with recognition as partners. Short-term approach.
• Type II – does not emphasize coordination of activities but more on their integration in a longer time horizon.
• Type III which requires a high level of operational integration.
The enshrined partnership model in Lambert’s conception consists of three elements: “engine” (Drivers), “catalyst” (Facilitators), and “components” (Components), “fig. 6”.

The three elements lead to an expected result of parties: operational integration.
a) Driver elements are established after careful examination of potential parties counting on their belief in significant benefits by: (1) cost efficiency, (2) improve customer service, (3) marketing advantage and (4) before stability / growth.
and develop partnership providing a basis for good relations while establishing materiality chance. Facilitators include: (1) corporate compatibility, (2) similar managerial philosophy and techniques, (3) reciprocity and (4) symmetry.
c) Component elements are mostly similar set of managerial actions and events that determines and dominates the life of the partnership. Components are operational relationship through: planning, control, communication, sharing of risks and rewards sharing etc.
Sharing of above elements leads to a result that implies an assessment, perhaps a readjustment. Feedback requires regular updating of state drivers, facilitators and components. Own processes and performance measurement provider enables companies to fully inform the partner, not only about the lowest price
The message of this study reinforces the idea that enterprise economy is more advantageous if it is placed increased emphasis on relations with suppliers. As a relatively young discipline, supplier relationship management has no strong response in practice, not being widely adopted in business. Dealing primarily with segmentation suppliers, establishing performance measurement tools and being currently limited to a series of e-processes, SRM is easily confused with a component of acquisition chain (SCM). Therefore, in the forthcoming period, SRM will remain stuck especially in the area of electronic research of the best prices and markets as well as e-procurement, due to increasing interest shown by organizations for the installation of custom electronic systems for tracking processes. Therefore it is for the managers to reconsider SRM and ensure strengthening current practices, especially regarding the relationships of the organization change attitudes, to transfer information on process outsourcing, procurement, contract tracking, etc. SRM adoption by organizations is part of a new management philosophy to increase the commitment and ability of suppliers, to maintain a successful relationship with them.
Campelo Eulálio G. F. and Stucky W. ”The Supplier Relationship Management Market Trends” in Proceedings of European and Mediterranean Conference on Information Systems 2007, (EMCIS2007), June 24-26 2007, Polytechnic University of Valencia, Spain, pp 53-67, ,, download 05.11.2012
[2] Sethi Sachin, ”Enhancing Supplier Relationship Management Using SAP SRM”, SAP PRESS 720 S., Auflage, 2010, htmlleseproben /gp/htmlprobID-108?GalileoSession=63827428A5ZHm8-lJ-g download 26.01.2012.
[3] Burnet Ken, ”Supplier Relationships in Businessbriefing: Global Purchasing & Supply Chain Strategies”, 2004, burnett.pdf , download 10.02.2012.
[4] Donoghue Joseph, ”Creating and Maintaining a Successful Supplier Relationship”, San Diego, CA 2011., , download 25.01.2012.
[5] Ravi R., Menzigian K, (2003), ”Supplier Relationship Management: Moving From Counterparties to Collaboration”, An IDC Executive Brief January 2003, SCM/scm.pdf, download 25.01.2012
[6] Alan Day, ”6 steps to better SRM”, Supply Management, Redactive Media Group, London, 2009,, download în 6.11.2012
[7] Itiliti, ”Applying the Principles of Supplier Relationship Management to Human Capital” 4/26/200, 2001, White Paper.pdf, download în 2.10.2012.
[8] Wikipedia, ”Supplier Relationship Management”,, download 06.11.2012
[9] Campelo Eulálio Gomes. Analysis of Current Supplier Relationship Management Practices: A Solution Proposal, Dissertation, Universität Karlsruhe, 2009, pp 1-234,, download 10.02.2012,
[10] Bokhorst G., Frensch C, Giling N, Kolk, ”Supplier Relationship Management Solutions: Expected Value”, Capgemini Consulting Mario Place Utrecht in SRM Research 2006-2007: Solution Analyses, 2006, download în 25.01.2012, 60p.
[11] Hughes Jonathan, ”What is Supplier Relationship Management and Why Does it Matter?”, Wiley, Inc 2010, , download 6.11.2012
[12] Hald Kim, Cordón Carlos, Vollmann Thomas, ”Towards an understanding of attraction in buyer-supplier relationships”, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 38, Issue 8, pp. 960 – 970, 2009, download 25.01.2012
[13] IDC Executive Brief, ”Supplier Relationship Management: Moving From “Counterparties” to Collaboration”, 2006,, download în 04.10.2012,
[14] Larson Chris, ”A Just-In-Time Supply Chain?”, in UPS Supply Chain Solutions, 2005, supply_chain.pdf, acesat în 26.01.2012
[15] Guerra Joy Andrews and Cianchette Carrie, ”Just-in-Time Information”, in Avenue A Razorfish, Seatle WA, 2006, slant/jit.pdf, acesat in 26.10.2012
[16] Wienclaw Ruth, ”B2B Business Models”, EBSCO Publishing Inc 2008
[17] Wise, R. & Morrison, ”Beyond the exchange: The future of B2B”, Harvard Business Review, 78(6), 86-96. 2007, retrived from EBSCO Online Database Business Source Complete.
[18] Barry L., Senthil G., Pradip K, ”Best Practice: Supplier Stratification in Managing in an Uncertain Economy ”, Council for Research on Distributor Best Practices (CRDBP), 2010, created by the NAW Institute for Distribution Excellence and the Supply Chain Systems Laboratory at Texas A&M University…/best-practice-s
[19] Gartner group: B2B Buy-Side E-Procurement (Application Components) Internet Commerce. Gartner Research, 2004. download in 28.01.2012
[20] Daley Andrew, The growing importance of Supplier Relationship Management Edbury Daley Ltd, Carrington Business Park, Carrington, Manchester, 2009,
[21] Evans Rima, ”When do we get to SRM?”, CPO Agenda (2010),, download 7 oct. 2012
[22] Vliet M.Van, ”Supplier Relationship Management Soluctions: Expected Value”, Capgemini Consulting, September, 2006 download in 02.10.2012
[23] Mettler Tobias and Rohner Peter, ”Supplier Relationship Management: A Case Study in the Context of Health Care”, in Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, ISSN 0718–1876, Electronic Version Universidad de Talca – Chile, Vol 4, December 2009 / 58-71, download 30.01.2012
[24] Gecker Rachel, Supplier Relationship Management, Corporate Meetings Incentives, 2008, 008/index1.html, download in 22.12.2011
[25] Emiliani M.L, ”Historical lessons in purchasing and supplier relationship management”, in Journal of Management History, Emerald Group Publishing Limited Vol. 16 No. 1, 2010, 21p., download 21.01.2012
[26] Lintukangas Katrina, ”Theoretical frames for studying supplier relationship management in global purchasing”, Lappeenranta University of Technology, School of Business, 2007, download în 25.01.2012
[27] Poirier C.Charles, ”Supplier Relationship Management: An Advanced Supply Chain Management Technique CSC Experiences. Results”. 2003, http:// www. Ascinstitute .com/library/whitepapers/SRM An Advanced SCM Technique.pdf, download în 12.12.2011, 13p.
[28] Pound Richard, Influencer – The Power to Change Anything, VitalSmarts, 2008, www. influencerbook. com,, 5p.
[29] Moldovan Gabriel, ”Relationship management”, Rrbium hr, 2006,,, download în 2.10.2012,
[30] Patterson Kerry, Grenny Joseph, Maxfield David and McMillan Ron, Influencer: The Power to Change Anything, 2007, Publisher: McGraw-Hill; 1 edition ISBN-10: 007148499X, 288 p
[31] Abosag Ibrahim, Caroline Tynan, Christopher Lewis, ”The Commitment-Trust Theory: The British and Saudi Arabian, Cross-National Perspective”, IMP Group, 2006., download in 12.10.2012.
[32] Abrahamsson Pekka, (2002), The Role of Commitment in Software Process Improvement, Academic Dissertation, Faculty of Science, University of Oulu, Linnanmaa,, download în 12.10.2012
[33] Meyer, J. P. & Allen, N. J. 1991. A three component conceptualization of organizational commitment. Human Resource Management Review, Vol. 1: 61- 89,, download 01.10.2012
[34] Dwyer Robert, Schurr Paul, Oh Sejo,. Developing Buyer-Seller Relationships. The Journal of Marketing, 51(2), 1987,, download în 12.10.2012
[35] Somogyi Simon, Gyau Amos, The impact of price satisfaction on supplier commitment in the Australian wine supply chain, 2010,, download 8.10.2012.
[36] Gyau, A., Spiller, A., The impact of supply chain governance structures on the interfirm relationship performance in agribusiness, Agricultural Economics, 54(4), 2008., aceesat 12.10.2012.
[37] Voge Wilf, Stakeholder Commitment: Why Is It Important?, ExecutiveBrief, 2009,, download în 12.10.2012.
[38] Conner Daryl and Patterson Robert, (1982), Building Commitment to Organizational Change,. Training and Development Journal, v36 n4.
[39] Conner Daryl, (1998), Committing to change, in Managing at the Speed of Change; How resilient managers succeed and prosper where others fail. John Wiley & Sons, ISBN 0-471-97494-3.
[40] Billington Corey, Cordon Carlos, Vollmann Tom, 2006, Super Supplier Collaboration, in Perspectives for managers,, download în 12.10.2012,
[41] Lambert, Douglas M. (2008), Supply Chain Management: Processes, Partnerships, Performance, Sarasota, Florida: Supply Chain Management Institute,, download 12.10.2012.
[42] Lambert M. Douglas, Knemeyer A. Michael Gardner T John, (2004), Supply chain partnerships: Model validation and implementation, Journalof business logistics, Vol. 25, No. 2,, download in 12.10.2012
[43] Unknow autor, The partnership model: a type of buyer-supplier relation. , download 12.10.2012

About Iacob Vladut

Doctor in stiinte economice din 2003, absolvent al Academiei de Studii Economice Bucuresti 1995, absolvent al Facultatii de Drept, Universitatea George Baritiu, Brasov 2009. Experienta didactica: lector univ. Universitatea Alma Mater din Sibiu – Facultatea SESP – Bacau, disciplina Economie; preparator disciplina Management ASE, Bucuresti, fac. EPA (1995-1996). Experienta profesionala: director economic la societati economice din Bacau si Sibiu. Alte competente: Auditor intern in Sistemul Managementului Calitatii- TUV Rheinland, Certificat in Management Open University Busines School Marea Britanie – CODECS Romania – MBA, Atestat in Management – ATTR Bucuresti. Publicatii: „Valea Muntelui – Dezvoltare economica in contextul integrarii europene”, ed. TIPOACTIV, 2005; articole diverse. Domenii de interes pentru acest blog: fonduri si finantari europene, alte finantari nerambursabile; management de proiect; implementarea proiectelor cu finantare europeana; cercetare; dezvoltare rurala; resurse umane; credite; analize micro- si macro-economice; economia intreprinderii; economie generala; juridic; management general; dezvoltare personala; contabilitate, control financiar, audit finaciar, analize financiare.

Lasă un răspuns

Adresa ta de email nu va fi publicată. Câmpurile obligatorii sunt marcate cu *

Acest sit folosește Akismet pentru a reduce spamul. Află cum sunt procesate datele comentariilor tale.